Haredim and Organ Donation, part 3 – Rabbi Elyashiv and the Angel of Death

Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv already permits a situation where haredim do not donate organs but the do take them.

In the mind of Rabbi Elyashiv, taking organs from a brain stem dead person is committing murder. Still, he allows his followers to benefit from those harvested organs.

Now Rabbi Elyashiv has gone…

…even further into his darkness, as Ynet reports:

"Thou shalt not kill," cried the pashkevils (large posters hung in public spaces) to the ultra-Orthodox community in Jerusalem on Wednesday. The rallying cry asked the haredi public to prepare for a battle that "will shake the very foundations of this country," against the newly approved law regarding brain and respiratory death. The writers accused the new bill of "permitting murder in the case of brain death." Which, they said, was "murder in every sense of the word."

Community rabbis cautioned the public to be aware of the new law and demand Torah commands be fulfilled in their entirety. "Doctors should also beware not to betray the word of God, and not to assist in murder," read the posters, adding blessings of wellness to the people of Israel suffering from illness.

On Wednesday morning two pashkevils ran the views of two of the most prominent rabbis belonging to the Lithuanian non-Hasidic ultra-Orthodox Jewish community. The first was a renewed publishing of a poster from 1991, the year in which Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach determined that the pronouncing one dead on the basis of brain death was tantamount to murder.

The second poster was published solely in Elyashiv's name, and said: "As I have already stated, as long as the heart (of the prospective organ donor) is still pumping blood, even in the case of 'brain death,' it is not permitted to remove any organ from the patient.'

'Provocative and shameless intervention'
A related article published in the community's paper read: "In the world of the Torah and the Halacha, much concern has been expressed regarding the provocative and shameless intervention in the grave subject of murder and (the Jewish law of) saving a life."

The newly approved organ donation law will give every family the right to decide by which halachic ruling they prefer the pronouncement of death to occur – whether based on brain death or heart failure.

Meanwhile, Sephardi Chief Rabbi of Israel, Shlomo Amar, and Shas spiritual leader Rabbi Ovadia Yosef have both voiced their support for the new law, which is intended to encourage organ donation among the religious community in Israel.

I pointed out earlier that Israelis are already banned from transplant waiting lists in all western countries except the US because Israelis take organs (from goyyim, of course) but do not donate.

Rabbi Tendler and others fear this ban will soon be extended to all Orthodox Jews.

Rabbi Elyashiv is wrong. He's wrong about the halakha. He's wrong for starting a public campaign against organ donations. And he is wrong for behaving like a spoiled child who cannot tolerate halakhic challenges.

He is a man who history will judge harshly, even as his followers march deeper into the the hell he has prepared for them.

Previous posts: 1 (lots of detailed information and sources) & 2.

Comments

[Anon]

--He's wrong about the halakha.--

And you know this how? Funny how you can criticize him for not respecting alternate view points but at the same time you do the same.

[Yochanan Lavie]

I didn't know Moshe Feinstein advocated murder.

[Barry]

The Halachic definition of death is discussed in Mesechta Yuma 85a. The Gemara there concerns persons trapped beneath a collapsed building on Shabbos. Obviously if there is a possibility that these persons are alive, one is required to be mechalel Shabbos in order to save them. The moment, however, one ascertains that a person trapped under debris is definitely dead, one must cease desecrating the Sabbath and wait until nightfall before continuing the process of removing the body. How does one determine if the person is dead? According to Rav Pappa's summation, if one began checking the body for signs of life from the feet there is a disagreement if one checks up to the heart or continues to check up to the nostrils. If, however, one begins checking from the head down, all agree that if one checked the nostrils and found no breath, one need not go on to check the heart. The Gemara, and the classical poskim (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 2:19, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 329:4) only mention the criterion of respiration as a criterion of death. The proponents of the brain stem death criterion argue that by virtue of its omission, the Gemara and the poskim clearly are indicating that cardiac death is not a necessary criterion of death. The Gemara's reliance on cessation of autonomous respiration as an indicative of death clearly indicates that the death of the brain death which controls that activity is a sufficient determinant of death.

Some later Askenazi poskim however put forward a less straight forward explanation suggesting that with the head exposed one must check for a neck pulse as well as lack of breathing so that lack of autonomous breathing is not in itself indicative of death.

This leads to three difficulties as far as I can tell

1. As a matter of Halakha, the Sephardim and Ashkenazim are both entitled to their different interpretation. As a practical matter this will cause great confusion

2. The Gemera assumes that a person who does not breath and whose pulse has stopped cannot be revived. We know that this is not true. Nowadays we would always pull such a person from a collapsed building and attempt to resuscitate. Clearly neither lack of breathing nor lack of pulse are indicative of inability to resuscitate so the whole basis of the Gemera is wrong.

3. Must we refuse to accept the possibility that the authors of the Gemera and poskim who lived many centuries ago may lack the knowledge that we now have? Should 120 Israelis die each year waiting for an organ transplant because Rabbi Eliyashiv does not want anyone's actions to challenge the words of the Chasam Sofer written some hundreds of years ago, be they Sephardim or non Haredi orthodox or secular?

[Shmarya]

--He's wrong about the halakha.--

And you know this how? Funny how you can criticize him for not respecting alternate view points but at the same time you do the same.

1. The halakha is based on science. Rabbi Elyashiv does not understand science, nor does he care to.

2. Rabbi Elyashiv allows his followers to use organs that come from a person specifically "murdered" to harvest them.

3. At the same time, his position makes it harder for Jews to get organs, and Jews die as a result.

Is Rabbi Elyashiv wrong about the halakha? You bet he is.

[Garnel Ironheart]

First of all, Rav Eliashiv does consult with physicians and experts when formulating psaks. So he's not ignorant of science despite how much people might want to perceive him as being.

On my blog, I noted that this issue has minimal to do with the new law and all to do with the Ashkenazic Chareidi community once again coming up with a psak and decided that this psak is the one and only rule that a Torah observant Jew can follow. Did Rav Feinstein have a different ruling? Did Rav Auerbach once state that he could see a different side of the issue? Who cares? The Gedolim have spoken. Toss out your Igros Moshe, you won't be needing it anymore.

By insisting on his opinion, Rav Eliashiv is saying that Rav Yosef doesn't know what he's talking about. He's saying Rav Amar is wrong. Why hasn't anyone else noticed this?

This is the true problem with the conflict and the one that must be challenged.

[Anon]

--The halakha is based on science. Rabbi Elyashiv does not understand science, nor does he care to.--

Actually, my understanding is that Rav Elyashiv's psak is based on sound scientific evidence. You apparently do not understand the basis for Rav Elyashiv's psak. His view, which admittedly is the most stringent view in this regard, is based on a halachic view that if any part of the body has any motion in it then the person must be considered to be alive. (Technically speaking, Rav Elyashiv is not paskening that this is the correct view, simply that it is at least a safek and if the person is safek alive the procedure would be forbidden.) Historically, this was the universally accepted view. It is only more recently with the advancement of science the question has arisen whether a person can be declared dead even if there is some movement in the body (e.g. based on some brain death standard or based on a determination that there is no spontaneous respiration). Many poskim have responded in the affirmative, but others disagree. Rav Elyashiv is one who disagrees and based on that view, his psak is supported by science in that there is still motion in the body (i.e. it is scientifically accurate to say that the heart is beating).

My rabbi does not follow Rav Elyashiv's view in this regard, so I would be the last to criticize someone else for not following his view. However, as usual, you use your infantile understanding of halacha and of Rav Elyashiv's view to seek to demean that viewpoint. Try to at least put a modest amount of effort into researching what you post about and in accurately presenting views you don't like.

[Shmarya]

His view, which admittedly is the most
stringent view in this regard, is based on a halachic view that if any part of the body has any motion in it then the person must be considered to be alive.

There is no halakhic or scientific basis for that statement.

Any brain stem dead person will cease all movement when the vent is turned off.

If a person was, God forbid, decapitated, his heat would continue to beat for a minute or two after decapitation. Yet a decapitate person is still dead.

as usual, you use your infantile understanding of halacha and of Rav Elyashiv's view to seek to demean that viewpoint.

This is exactly what Rabbii Elyashiv and his followers are doing at this moment to all the rabbis and doctors who disagree with them.

Funny how you never criticize that.

[paul]

Just for the record:

1. Many Poskim, are strongly opposed to Organ Donations based on 'brain death'. You can hear Rabbi Shechter explain this position and take harsh criticism for it on YUtorah.org.

2. The oft quoted psak of Reb Moshe is not so clear. Rabbi Tendler, his son-in-law had a spirited correspondece with an author in the Jewish Observer many years ago (republished in the anthology 'The Ethical Imperative'). Rabbi Tendler conceded that his father-in-law had indicated in writing that Organ Donations may not be halachically advisable. I may be wrong, but I do not believe that any psakim on this issue were published in Igros Moshe.

3. Reb Elyashiv made a statement. Reb Elyashiv is not putting up posters. Someone with 400 NIS is putting up posters.

[Shmarya]

1. "Many poskim?"

You mean many Israeli haredi poskim and hasidim.

2. The pesak of Rav Moshe has been verified in dozens of different ways. Much of the writtin correspondence is up on HODS.org, and there is much video testimony, as well.

3. Rabbi Elyashiv did more than "make a statement," and you know it.

Further, he could easily have said, "no wall posters, no campaign." He did not.

[Anon]

--There is no halakhic or scientific basis for that statement.--

I'm beginning to suspect that you enjoy having people illustrate your ignorance. This position is taken by Rashi in Yoma - namely with regard to the rule the cessation of breathing is deemed death under jewish law that is only if there is no movement in the body. This view is cited by a number of poskim as law. BTW, this it the position of Rabbi Bleich as well. A more moderate view would be that of Rabbi Schachter who agrees with Rabbi Bleich in practice but based on the notion that the patient is safek live. I'm not sure whose view is adopted by Rav Elyashiv or whether there are any practical differences between the two.

--Any brain stem dead person will cease all movement when the vent is turned off.--

Wrong. Although breathing requires some brain function, the heart operates independent of the brain. Thus the heart can continue to beat though it will inevitably fail due to lack of oxygen.

--If a person was, God forbid, decapitated, his heat would continue to beat for a minute or two after decapitation. Yet a decapitate person is still dead.--

Decapitation yes - but many poskim (including the aforementioned) have ruled that brain death is only deemed the equivalent of decapitation if there has been a total liquification of the brain stem. In fact, Rabbi Tendler's view that brain death is the equivalent of decapitation is an extreme minority view. Even the rabbis that accept brain death as time of death, accept that because of a different theory - namely that brain death is proof of lack of spontaneous respiration and they are of the view, contrary to Rav Elyashiv, Rabbi Bleich and Rav Herschel Shachter that lack of spontaneous respiration is death even if the heart is still beating.

--Funny how you never criticize that.--

That was not the point of your post. If you post that you respect Rav Elyashiv's view but he should also respect your, then I'll give this issue some thought. Until then it has no relevance to your post.

[Shmarya]

1. Rashi's position is not adopted by the Shulkhan Arukh, the rema or by any other codifiers.

It is not part of what would be called accepted halakha l'maase. It is not how chevra kadishas operated for, at the very least, the last 500 years.

When breathing ceases, the heart stops functioning within moments. It "dies," as you put it, almost immediately.

Further, even though this is impossible, assume for a moment the heart kept beating indefinitely after breathing has ceased.

Because the blood is not oxygenated, the body's other organs will rapidly become destroyed. While not immediately viable to the naked eye, the liver, kidneys, etc., will rapidly become too damaged to support life.

2. You make Rabbi Tendler's opinion more extreme than it really is.

The fact that a heart could continue to beat indefinitely after complete decapitation (as long as the person were on life support immediately before, during and after the (surgical) decapitation, should have made this clear.

It did to many poskim, as you well know.

3. That was not the point of your post. If you post that you respect Rav Elyashiv's view but he should also respect your, then I'll give this issue some thought. Until then it has no relevance to your post.

Wrong. A point of my post, clearly made in the conclusion, is that the character and behavior of RYSE is far from exemplary.

It's his way or the highway, no matter who it is that holds opposite him.

4. Now I'll add a bit of my own here.

People with accurately diagnosed brain stem death do not recover. They do not ever breathe spontaneously or in any way function .

If the vent is disconnected, they do not brethe.

Halakha could not foresee a time when a person, unable to breathe in any way, would be kept "alive," so to speak, by machinery.

Nor could halakha foresee a time when doctors could remove an organ from such a brain dead stem person and transplant those organs into another human being, therefore saving this person's life.

If rabbis like Rabbi Elyashiv (and Bleich, etc.) want to hold that organ donation is murder, then let them and their followers opt out of the transplant system entirely, so they will not receive organs taken from a "murdered" person.

Of course, this will never happen.

All of these so-called holy men and their followers will accept an organ from a "murdered" person. Why? Because they want to live.

It is difficult to construe Rabbi Elyashiv's position as principled under these circumstance.

Instead, it is just another example of haredim being selfish. "What is mine and what is your is mine."

And that is an evil position.

[Garnel Ironheart]

First of all, there has to be a better effort in the defining terms. To wit:

1) Brain death - loss of function of the cerebrum and cerebellum. In such a case, the person still has a functioning brain stem (which is the bridge between the brain and the spinal cord) and can breath independently.

2) Brain stem death - loss of function of the brain stem which means loss of function of the respiratory control centre. Such a person will NOT breathe independently when removed from a respirator.

3) The chances of recovery from either type of injury are ZERO. Any miraculous stories to the contrary usually involve misdiagnosis or presumptive decision making.

Now, in truth, the gap between Rav Eliashiv and the rest of the halachic world is quite small. The rest say that since the brain stem is gone, the person is no longer alive and the only reason the heart is beating is because it is being artifically fed oxygen. Stop the oxygen and a minute or two later there goes the heart. Rav Eliashiv says that life is in the heart which means as long as it's beating the person is alive.
In the field, this difference would mean nothing. A person with a dead brain stem would lose his heart beat shortly after. It's in hospital where a patient is on a respirator that the issue comes up.
In the case, the real issue is one side demanding that its interpretation of the halachah be the ONLY interpretation allowed. I don't see why people aren't mentioning this more.

[Archie Bunker]

This blog post is the best indication that Shmarya is just an ignorant little nobody with ulterior & sinister motives. It must help pass the time while buried in snow at his lonely outpost in Minnesota.

Here is the wannabe soothsayer gushing forth his ill will:

"even as his followers march deeper into the the hell he has prepared for them."

Here is Shmarya engaging in one of his classic lies that is easy to disprove:

"Rabbi Elyashiv does not understand science, nor does he care to."

It is well known that RYSE consults with scientific experts.

After leaving some baal teshuva factory, we don't know what yeshiva Shmarya learned in because he won't say. We don't know if those yeshivos had learning anywhere near a high level. Even if say Shmarya somehow managed to be accepted to say Lakewood, RIETS Kollel Elyon or Ponvitch, he could have been one of the rachmonus cases who somehow got in but never fit in learning-wise.

Ok, so let's assume he was a very bright student in Brisk. That he thinks he can argue with 90 year old scholars who know the codes & responsa by heart is completely ludicrous.

[Shmarya]

And you, Bunker? You can argue with "90 year old scholars"?

Of course not.

So, you choose which old man to follow, and spend your life denigrating the other old men who refuse to follow him.

Pathetic.

[Garnel Ironheart]

It's a funny thing, Shmarya, but I never got the sense you were an old man!

8-)